The main argument by Wilders is that his country of the Netherlands (and Europe) are being "Islamified." This is can be proven to be a myth by looking at demographic, statical and social scientific evidence. The most immigrants to the Netherlands come from other EU member states, like Poland.
Why in hell can't anybody over there take a look at basic demographic evidence that "Islamification" is a myth?

We should work to relegate the "islamification" myth to the same garbage heap as Holocaust denial.

The reality is the the PVV's gains are a classical protest vote. The CDA's numbers went down and the PVV's went up. This is protest voting, and that's how the major parties will view this.
If you really take a look at then numbers, you see that the Netherlands is still left-leaning.
no - Wilders will proably not be in goverment - as his presence will be distructive and counter productive.

Also, the Netherlands has been a nation of immigrants since about the time (late 1500's) of William the Orange, who was described as being tolerant of religions. This tolerance for religion beliefs brought various religions to the Netherlands, and especially Jews to Amsterdam.

It could be argued that during the pliiarization period height (1950s) Catholics were "less assimilated" that Dutch Muslims are today. A Dutch Catholic would be born at a Catholic hospital, be educated at a Catholic school, marry a Catholic spouse, read Catholic newspapers, be in Catholic associations, vote for Catholic parties, and be buried at a Catholic cemetery after he dies...

The reality is that Geert Wilders is a threat to his own country. What Wilders wants to do would destroy the Netherlands as a civilized nation. There can be no policies that single out an ethnic group for school closings, buldoze houses of woriship, and forbid the reading of a religious book. Shooting people in the knees as punishment for crime is also illegal, as is stripping them of their citizenship and sending them into exile.

The Netherlands, like all other nations, has the responsibility to protect all its people, regardless of their religious practices, and that include not persecuting them and protecting them from persecution.

The Netherlands would start to resemble Milosevic's "greater Serbia" - and this would damage the country internationally and perhaps cause the country to be excluded from the rest of the world. Businesses would flee and so will the jobs. The Netherlands membership of such organizations, like NATO and the EU, would be in danger. After Geert Wilders is sitting in prison for his crimes, the stigma of such behavior would stick to the Dutch people for a very long time.

All of this would be over the myth of "Islamification" which is not happening, either in the Netherlands or in Europe. To destroy your own country over a myth - Wilders is really a self-hating Dutchman!

Nations simply cannot engage in "cleansings" and state violence against people that "don't fit in' or "are different from our race and culture." This is what Slobodan Milsosevic tried to do - and its simply not tolerated in the international community!

The reason for migration from ALL countries starting from post-WWII was to fill labor shortage, not "some leftist dream." (Unless you believe in the "islamification myth?")

There is a question under European law and human rights conventions that forbidding immigration "from non-Western nations" can actually be illegal. Discrimination based on religion and national origins is illegal in the EU, and possibly under international law. Does this include Russia?

: The reality is that Dutch Muslims are just as Dutch as non-Muslims. Wilders is promoting a problem that simply does not exist.

QUOTE: It’s quite possible for descendants of Turkish and Moroccan immigrants (i.e. the Second Generation) to
combine strong feelings of belonging to different social groups, such as feeling ‘Amsterdammer’,
‘Rotterdammer’, ‘Dutch’ and Muslim. A fair percentage of the Second Generation does not practise their
religion by praying and are of the opinion that religion should play no role, or only a minor one, in today’s
society and in politics. Many find the use of religious symbols in schools acceptable, but only a minority say
that Muslim women should wear a head scarf outside the home. http://www.nidi.knaw.nl/en/output/demos/2009/demo...

Islam is as much of a threat to Europe as a Martians are from Mars. The reality is that this is really a non-issue for the Netherlands, which needs to focus on the economy and not these kinds of extreme issue.

If not a tolerant and multicultural society - then what? More bigotry and hate of others because of who they are? Violent deportation of "those that don't belong?" The prerequisite for living in a free society based on individual liberty is tolerance of others who are different, except if you live in Nazi Germany..

First of all, these bans will fall, as they are violation of the European Convention of Human Rights. Nations simply cannot do as they please, especially EU Member States. The first action could also be for an Muslim interest group to petition the Commission for infringement proceedings against all Member States that ban headscarves and burkas. The view out of the COE is that these bans are, in fact, illegal.http://www.coe.int/t/commissioner/Viewpoints/1003...

Second of all, there is NO incompatibility between Islam and democracy.
"A recent in-depth Gallup survey in 10 predominantly Muslim countries, representing more than 80% of the global Muslim population, shows that when asked what they admire most about the West, Muslims frequently mention political freedom, liberty, fair judicial systems, and freedom of speech. When asked to critique their own societies, extremism and inadequate adherence to Islamic teachings were their top grievances." http://www.muslimwestfacts.com/mwf/File/109489/Is...